list_notes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It mentions 'list all notes' and 'optional search filter', but doesn't disclose pagination, rate limits, permissions, or what 'legacy' entails (e.g., deprecated features). This leaves gaps for a read operation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. However, the parenthetical 'legacy with search support' adds minor clutter without clear utility, slightly reducing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic action and parameter, but lacks details on return format, error handling, or the implications of 'legacy', which could affect agent usage given the sibling tools available.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'search' parameter as an optional query. The description adds minimal value by reiterating 'optional search filter' and noting 'legacy with search support', but doesn't provide additional syntax, format, or behavioral context beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'notes in the vault', specifying it retrieves all notes with optional filtering. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_note' (single note) and 'get_recent_notes' (subset), but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'search_vault' or 'find_related_notes'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for retrieving all notes, optionally filtered by search, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_vault' or 'find_related_notes'. The mention of 'legacy with search support' hints at context but doesn't clarify exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.